if it's good enough for gary patterson, it's good enough for us

[Millhouse]

We did embrace it and it didn't work because we didn't have the personnel to run it. The issue, as discussed before is: do you run the offesne that best fits the personnel you have and try to win with it, then recruit the guys you want to do what you really want to do or do you start out doing what you really want to do to send the message to players who would like to play in that system that this is the place to come? I'm not sure any of us know the answer to that for sure but I'm sure there are some who are sure they do. I tend toward winning with what you've got then switching to what you want to do when you get the kids who can run it, which is basically what we did in the 80's. I've said many times that the Dome was the ideal place for a high-powered passing offense and I wish we'd been the pioneers for that, rather than a belated follower. But you could hardly have run that with Todd Norley and Mike Siano.

Hunt and McDonald were the problem. At some point all these good offenses went for it. It's not like we have much to lose

 

[Millhouse]

Boykin has always been pretty damn good, if you've seen him play at all.

Not true

 

[Millhouse]

There is zero talent at WR outside of Ishmael. Go back and really watch the games and tell me how often our guys get separation -- real separation -- relative to other teams in the ACC. Even Ishmael is generally making fantastic 1 on 1 grabs with a guy draped all over him. West does the same. How often has Broyld ever broken one deep? Guy still has zero touchdowns. When was the last time Estime, Mr. Speed, got behind a defense? When was the last time Erv even threatened to get past the 30 on a kick return? The talent at WR is is just not there-- there is a reason Ishamel is our #1 as a true freshman. Not one time this season have I ever thought "wow our guy just burned their guy really bad" -- it's always a Houdini catch in traffic. How many of our skill position guys on offense are even going to sniff the NFL? Having said that I give a heck of a lot of credit to Shafer/Bullough, the defense, and especially the offensive line -- all are playing very, very well given the circumstances. Our speed/depth at WR/corner is never going to match FSU and Clemson. Once we are back in the top 25 regularly we will get the occasional stud but we will never have a plethora of speed like they do. That is always going to be an issue for us. TCU only passes the ball 53.5% of the time. Syracuse 47.4% of the time. It's not like that's a world of difference. In fact we have run 557 plays in 8 games, so if we passed as much as TCU that works out to about 4 additional passing plays per game. That's not going to be the difference in us being 3-5 and us being 6-2. I think we can agree that we'd all like to see more down the field passes. McDonald lined up a bunch of WRs and just tried to run by defenses, it didn't work. Lester has gone back to more pick plays and schemes and suddenly the offense looks at least halfway decent again. I'd love to see an offense that is balanced but takes more play action deep shots. That is the true theme behind these Baylor/TCU offenses. It's not the number of passing playings, it's the number of deep shots. With our current talent we can't take deep shots without a quality run game and play action. With McDonald play action was non-existant. I'm not a huge fan of the pistol for that reason, the play action fake out of it isn't quite as dangerous.

You don't need to match FSU to run that offense,

You ignore the history of the air raid and you ignore that running it attracts talent

But fine we will run air cubit which has never been good anywhere

 

[qdawgg]

You don't need to match FSU to run that offense,

You ignore the history of the air raid and you ignore that running it attracts talent

But fine we will run air cubit which has never been good anywhere

You completely ignored the most important thing he said

"TCU only passes the ball 53.5% of the time. Syracuse 47.4% of the time. It's not like that's a world of difference. In fact we have run 557 plays in 8 games, so if we passed as much as TCU that works out to about 4 additional passing plays per game. That's not going to be the difference in us being 3-5 and us being 6-2."

 

[Millhouse]

You completely ignored the most important thing he said "TCU only passes the ball 53.5% of the time. Syracuse 47.4% of the time. It's not like that's a world of difference. In fact we have run 557 plays in 8 games, so if we passed as much as TCU that works out to about 4 additional passing plays per game. That's not going to be the difference in us being 3-5 and us being 6-2."

You can run in the air raid. You don't have to be leach

I'm glad you pointed that out.

 

[Tigerfan4life]

Baylor, Okie State, Texas Tech, and West Virginia

Just kinda bouncing around today and figured I would chime in on this. Only one of those teams run the "air raid" and thats Texas Tech. The others just run variations of the HUNH spread. The two offenses are NOT the same thing. The main difference in these teams are they play to what is there strengths and that can change from year to year. Malzhan at Auburn is a perfect example. When he had Newton it was heavy read option and passing from Newton. The last two years he has been much more run heavy because he is loaded at Oline and RB.

Morris preferred to to be run first with his HUNH when he came to Clemson from Tulsa but after getting to Clemson he adapted to what he had(Boyd, Watkins, Hopkins, etc) and went more pass but still balanced for the most part. Thats the same thing Patterson is doing. Adapting to what he has. They lost a TON of defensive kids and have a ton of talent on offense. So my guess would be he thought "if I cant stop them I will out score them". That may change when his defensive guys get a little better. Point is that good coaches adapt and thats what Patterson has done.